National Unity Insurance Company v. Rio National Insurance Services, Inc. et al

Filing 11

ORDER Approving 10 Stipulation Regarding Motion for Ex Parte Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction and Defendants' Response to the extent the stipulation applies to the plaintiff and defendant, Steven Kerbel. The Motion for Ex Parte Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction 2 is denied as moot and without prejudice as to defendant, Steve Kerbel. By Judge Robert E. Blackburn on 8/6/2015. (mlace, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge Robert E. Blackburn

Civil Action No. 15-cv-01626-REB-NYW
NATIONAL UNITY INSURANCE COMPANY, a Texas Corporation,
Plaintiff,
v.
RIO NATIONAL INSURANCE SERVICES, INC., a Colorado Corporation,
RIO NATIONAL INSURANCE SERVICES OF ARIZONA, INC. a Colorado Corporation,
RIO CLAIMS SERVICE, INC., a Colorado Corporation,
STEVEN KERBEL, an individual resident of Colorado, and
VANESSA JOAQUIM, an individual resident of Colorado.
Defendants.

ORDER APPROVING STIPULATION
Blackburn, J.
The matter comes before me on (1) the Motion for Ex Parte Temporary
Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction [#2]1 filed July 30, 2015; and (2) the
Stipulation Regarding Motion for Ex Parte Temporary Restraining Order and
Preliminary Injunction and Defendants’ Response [#10] filed July 31, 2015. In the
stipulation [#10], the plaintiff and defendant, Steven Kerbel, agree to the entry of an
order by the court concerning the issues raised in the motion for temporary restraining
order [#2].

1

“[#2]” is an example of the convention I use to identify the docket number assigned to a
specific paper by the court’s case management and electronic case filing system (CM/ECF). I use this
convention throughout this order.

I note that Steven Kerbel purports to approve the stipulation on behalf of and as
authorized representative of defendants, Rio National Insurance Services, Inc., Rio
National Insurance Services of Arizona, Inc., and Rio Claims Service, Inc. Mr. Kerbel is
not an attorney who has entered an appearance in this case on behalf of these
corporate defendants. Thus, Mr. Kerbel may not represent these corporate defendants
in this case as an “authorized representative.” Harrison v. Wahatoyas, LLC, 253 F.3d
552, 556 (10th Cir. 2001) (“As a general matter, a corporation or other business
entity can only appear in court through an attorney and not through a non-attorney
corporate officer appearing pro se.”). Therefore, the stipulation [#10] is effective only as
to the plaintiff and Mr. Kerbel. Nothing in the record reflects a valid agreement by any
other defendant to the terms of the stipulation. However, to the extent Mr. Kerbel
exercises control over the actions of the three corporate defendants, I order him to
comply with the stipulation. However, the motion for temporary restraining order shall
remain pending as to all defendants other than Mr. Kerbel.
Without admitting any wrongdoing, which is expressly denied by Mr. Kerbel, the
plaintiff, National Unity Insurance Company, and Mr. Kerbel agree as follows:
1. Mr. Kerbel will not shut down or interfere with the operation of their former
computer system for one-hundred and eighty (180) days from the date of this order;
2. Mr. Kerbel will forward all correspondence, mail, e-mail, telephone calls,
voicemails, etc., to plaintiff National Unity Insurance Company (NUIC) every three (3)
business days for ninety (90) days from the date of this order;
3. Mr. Kerbel will not cancel, modify or alter the E&O insurance policy, believed
to be Scottsdale Indemnity Co. Policy # ABI-0002342; and
4. So long as Mr. Kerbel complies with the terms of this stipulated order for the
2

entire 180 day term, the plaintiff will file a motion or stipulation to dismiss this case, at
least as to Mr. Kerbel, without prejudice at the conclusion of the 180 day term.
THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED as follows:
1. That the Stipulation Regarding Motion for Ex Parte Temporary
Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction and Defendants’ Response [#10]
filed July 31, 2015, is approved to the extent the stipulation applies to the plaintiff and
defendant, Steven Kerbel;
2. That the plaintiff and defendant, Steven Kerbel, shall comply with the terms of
their stipulation, which terms are enumerated and specified in this order;
3. That defendant, Steven Kerbel, shall not violate the terms of the stipulation by
authorizing, directing, or soliciting action, either directly or indirectly, by any employee,
officer, agent, servant, independent contractor, or corporate entity over whom or which
Mr. Kerbel exercises authority or control whether personally, professionally,
contractually, or otherwise;
4. That in light of the stipulation, the Motion for Ex Parte Temporary
Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction [#2] filed July 30, 2015, is denied as
moot and without prejudice as to defendant, Steve Kerbel; and
5. That the Motion for Ex Parte Temporary Restraining Order and
Preliminary Injunction [#2] filed July 30, 2015, shall remain pending as to all other
defendants.
Dated August 6, 2015, at Denver, Colorado
BY THE COURT:

3